AS MEXICO EXPORTS THEIR POOR, CRIMINAL AND ANCHOR BABY BREEDERS ALONG WITH HEROIN, WHAT DO THEY DO WITH THEIR ILLEGALS???
THEY EXPORT THEM ON THE SPOT!!!
Mexico has a single, streamlined law that ensures that foreign visitors
and immigrants are:
1.) in the country legally;
2.) have the
means to sustain themselves economically;
3.) not destined
to be burdens on society;
4.) of economic
and social benefit to society;
5.) of good
character and have no criminal records; and
6.) contributors
to the general well-being of the nation.
The law also
ensures that:
7.) immigration
authorities have a record of each foreign visitor;
8.) foreign
visitors do not violate their visa status;
9.) foreign
visitors are banned from interfering in the country’s internal politics;
10.) foreign
visitors who enter under false pretenses are imprisoned or deported;
11.) foreign
visitors violating the terms of their entry are imprisoned or deported;
12.) those who
aid in illegal immigration will be sent to prison.
Vicente Fox: Trump’s ‘Aggressive’ Language Played Role in 7-Year-Old Girl’s Death
1:06
Saturday in Beverly Hills, CA, former Mexican President Vicente Fox told TMZ he blamed President Donald Trump for the tragic death of a seven-year-old girl in Border Patrol custody on December 7.
Fox said, “This is not what the U.S. is all about. This is what Trump is all about. He doesn’t have any love or care or compassion to anybody. I don’t know why this country has a president like him. We all miss the United States that we have known for years and years. The leader in the world, a compassionate nation, a nation that cares and builds a better world. So I hope you get rid of Trump soon.”
When asked who is to blame for the death, Fox said, “First the people that was involved directly but they act on their orders from somebody else. So you have to go all the way to the top. The language is more aggressive than physical violence. Speaking the way Trump speaks is not good for this nation.”
THE CONSPIRACY TO SABOTAGE HOMELAND SECURITY
The Democrat
Party’s secret agenda for wider open borders, more welfare for invading
illegals, more jobs and free anything they illegally vote for…. All to destroy
the two-party system and build the GLOBALISTS’ DEMOCRAT PARTY FOR WIDER OPEN
BORDERS TO KEEP WAGES DEPRESSED.
https://mexicanoccupation.blogspot.com/2018/11/frontpage-hidden-agenda-of-pueblo-sin.html
Demonstrably and
irrefutably the Democrat Party became
the party whose principle objective is to thoroughly transform the nature of
the American electorate by means of open borders and the mass, unchecked
importation of illiterate third world peasants who will vote in overwhelming
numbers for Democrats and their La Raza welfare state. FRONTPAGE MAG
THE CONSPIRACY TO SABOTAGE HOMELAND SECURITY
The Democrat
Party’s secret agenda for wider open borders, more welfare for invading
illegals, more jobs and free anything they illegally vote for…. All to destroy
the two-party system and build the GLOBALISTS’ DEMOCRAT PARTY FOR WIDER OPEN
BORDERS TO KEEP WAGES DEPRESSED.
https://mexicanoccupation.blogspot.com/2018/11/frontpage-hidden-agenda-of-pueblo-sin.html
Demonstrably and
irrefutably the Democrat Party became
the party whose principle objective is to thoroughly transform the nature of
the American electorate by means of open borders and the mass, unchecked
importation of illiterate third world peasants who will vote in overwhelming
numbers for Democrats and their La Raza welfare state. FRONTPAGE MAG
HOW MANY HUNDREDS OF BILLIONS WILL WE LET
MEXICO SUCK OUT OF OUR OPEN BORDERS?
There are many reasons
why, for the first time, the government of Mexico would agree to work
cooperatively with the United States over an extremely serious
immigration-related issue. It is likely, of course that President Trump was not
just posturing when he said he would cut off aid to Mexico and other countries
who permit the United States to be invaded by illegal aliens.
*
Under Guzman’s leadership,
the Sinaloa Cartel became the largest drug trafficking organization in the
world with influence in every major U.S. city.
*
The allegations against Pena Nieto are
not new. In 2016, Breitbart
News reported on an investigation by
Mexican journalists which revealed how Juarez Cartel operators
funneled money into the 2012 presidential campaign. The investigation
was carried out by Mexican award-winning journalist Carmen
Aristegui and her team….The subsequent scandal became
known as “Monexgate” for the cash cards that were given out during
Peña Nieto’s campaign. The allegations against Pena Nieto went largely
unreported by U.S. news outlets.
MEXICO
DECLARES WAR ON THE UNITED STATES
THE
INVASION:
“The radicals seek
nothing less than secession from the United States whether to form their own
sovereign state or to reunify with Mexico. Those who desire reunification with
Mexico are irredentists who seek to reclaim Mexico's "lost"
territories in the American Southwest.” Maria Hsia Chang Professor of Political
Science, University of Nevada Reno
*
"Mexican president
candidate Andrés Manuel López Obrador called for mass immigration to the United
States, declaring it a "human right". We will defend all the
(Mexican) invaders in the American," Obrador said, adding that immigrants
"must leave their towns and find a life, job, welfare, and free medical in
the United States."
"Fox’s Tucker
Carlson noted Thursday that Obrador has previously proposed ranting AMNESTY TO
MEXICAN DRUG CARTELS. “America is now Mexico’s social safety net, and that’s a
very good deal for the Mexican ruling class,” Carlson added."
COST to
AMERICANS of the LA RAZA MEXICAN OCCUPATION in CALIFORNIA
ALONE: $2,370 per legal.
All that
“cheap” labor is staggeringly expensive!
"Most Californians, who have seen their taxes increase while public
services deteriorate, already know the impact that mass illegal immigration is
having on their communities, but even they may be shocked when they learn just
how much of a drain illegal immigration has become." FAIR President Dan
Stein.
Californians
bear an enormous fiscal burden as a result of an illegal alien population
estimated at almost 3 million residents. The annual expenditure of state and
local tax dollars on services for that population is $25.3 billion. That total
amounts to a yearly burden of about $2,370 for a household headed by a U.S.
citizen.
THE DEMOCRAT PARTY’S WAR ON AMERICA’S LEGAL
WORKERS, BORDERS AND LAWS as they build the LA RAZA welfare state on our backs.
One in
every eleven
persons born in Mexico has gone to the U.S. The National Review reported
that in
2014 $1.87 billion was spent on incarcerating illegal immigrant
criminals….Now add hundreds of billions for welfare and
remittances! MICHAEL BARGO, Jr…… for the AMERICAN THINKER.COM
"Chairman of the DNC Keith Ellison was even
spotted wearing a shirt stating, "I
don't believe in borders" written in Spanish.
According to a new CBS news poll, 63 percent of Americans in competitive
congressional districts think those crossing illegally should be immediately
deported or arrested. This is undoubtedly contrary to the views
expressed by the Democratic Party.
Their endgame is open borders, which has become evident over
the last eight years. Don't for one second let them convince you
otherwise." Evan
Berryhill Twitter @EvBerryhill.
http://mexicanoccupation.blogspot.com/2018/07/assault-on-american-worker-college-grad.html
Mexican Presidents Deny
They Took Bribes from El
Chapo
14 Nov 201898
3:02
Two former Mexican
presidents publicly denied taking bribes from the Sinaloa Cartel. The statements
came after the legal defense for Joaquín “El Chapo” Guzmán Loera made contrary
claims this week.
The
drug lord is facing several money laundering and drug trafficking charges at a
federal trial in New York. In his opening statement, defense attorney Jeffrey
Lichtman spoke of bribes “including the very top, the current president of
Mexico and the former.”
Soon
after the statements became public, Mexico’s government issued a statement
denying the allegations. Eduardo Sanchez, the spokesman for current Mexican
President Enrique Pena Nieto said the statements were false and “defamatory.”
El gobierno de @EPN persiguió, capturó y extraditó al criminal Joaquín Guzmán Loera. Las
afirmaciones atribuidas a su abogado son completamente falsas y difamatorias
Former
Mexican President Felipe Calderon took to social media to personally deny the
allegations, claiming that neither El Chapo or the Sinaloa Cartel paid him
bribes.
Son absolutamente falsas y temerarias las afirmaciones
que se dice realizó el abogado de Joaquín “el Chapo” Guzmán. Ni él, ni el
cártel de Sinaloa ni ningún otro realizó pagos a mi persona.
Under
Guzman’s leadership, the Sinaloa Cartel became the largest drug trafficking
organization in the world with influence in every major U.S. city.
The
allegations against Pena Nieto are not new. In 2016, Breitbart News reported on an investigation by Mexican
journalists which revealed how Juarez Cartel operators funneled money into the
2012 presidential campaign. The investigation was carried out by Mexican
award-winning journalist Carmen Aristegui and her team. The
subsequent scandal became known as “Monexgate” for the cash cards that were given
out during Peña Nieto’s campaign. The allegations against Pena Nieto went
largely unreported by U.S. news outlets.
Ildefonso Ortiz is an
award-winning journalist with Breitbart Texas. He co-founded the Cartel
Chronicles project with Brandon Darby and Stephen K. Bannon. You can
follow him on Twitter and on Facebook. He can be contacted at Iortiz@breitbart.com.
Brandon Darby is the managing director and editor-in-chief of
Breitbart Texas. He co-founded the Cartel Chronicles project with Ildefonso
Ortiz and Stephen K. Bannon. Follow him on Twitter and Facebook. He can be contacted at bdarby@breitbart.com.
Should
We Invade Mexico?
https://townhall.com/columnists/kurtschlichter/2018/07/05/should-we-invade-mexico-n2497140?utm_campaign=rightrailsticky2
The opinions expressed by
columnists are their own and do not represent the views of Townhall.com.
One fact a lot of Americans forget is
that our country is located right up against a socialist failed state that is
promising to descend even further into chaos – not California, the other one. And the Mexicans,
having reached the bottom of the hole they have dug for themselves, just chose
to keep digging by electing a new leftist presidente who wants
to surrender to the cartels and who thinks that Mexicans have some sort of
hitherto unknown “human right” to sneak into the United States and
demographically reconquer it. There’s a Spanish phrase that describes his
ideology, and one of the words is toro.
Mexico is already a failed state,
crippled by a poisoned, stratified culture and a corrupt government that have
somehow managed to turn a nation so blessed with resources and hardworking
people into such a basket case that millions of its citizens see their best
option as putting themselves in the hands of gangsters to cross a burning
desert to get cut-rate jobs in el Norte. It is a country dominated by bloody
drug/human trafficking cartels that like to circulate videos of their members
carving up living people. They hang mutilated corpses from overpasses and
hijack busloads of citizens to rape and slaughter for fun. Whole police
agencies are owned by the cartels. Political candidates live in fear of murder.
The people are scared. And this chaos will inevitably grow and spread north.
The gangs
are already here, importing the meth and fentanyl that are slaughtering tens of
thousands of Americans a year after coming across the border the Democrats
refuse to defend. Let’s not even think about the other foreigners, like Islamic
terrorists, who might exploit this vulnerability. “Abolish ICE,” the liberals
screech, yet what they really mean is “Erase that line on the map.” But that
line is all that is keeping the bloodshed in Mexico at bay for now. You can
stand on US soil, look south, and see places where the rates of killing dwarf
those of the Middle Eastern killing fields you see on TV.
The chaos
in Mexico will spill over the theoretical border. It is just a matter of time.
Normal Americans know it. As my book upcoming book Militant Normals explains,
the establishment willfully ignoring their legitimate concerns about border
security is a big part of why Normals are getting militant. The Democrats, and
the GOP donor class stooges, have a vested interest in ignoring the issue, and
they will insure that both the political class and the hack media will continue
to play ostrich. Already there are Americans, on American soil, living near the
border who cannot venture outside at night on their own property for fear of
being murdered because of foreigners invading out territory. This is
intolerable for any sovereign country. Yet there is a huge liberal
constituency, abetted by GOPe fellow travelers, not merely willing to tolerate
the invasion but who actively want to increase the flow.
When the
125-million-man criminal conspiracy that is Mexico falls apart completely, as
it will, we are going to have to deal with the consequences. Watch the flood of
illegals become a tsunami, a real refugee crisis instead of today’s fake one.
Watch the criminal gangs and pathologies of the Third World socialist culture
they bring along turn our country into Mexico II: Gringo Boogaloo.
And importing a huge mass of foreigners, loyal to a foreign
country and potentially susceptible to the reconquista de Aztlan rhetoric
of leftists, both among them and among our treacherous liberal elite, would
create a cauldron for brewing up violent civil upheaval right here at home.
So, what
do we do? We defend ourselves, obviously. But how?
Should we
be reactive? Should we continue the fake defense of our border we’re pretending
to conduct today? Or should we seriously defend ourselves by building a wall
and truly guarding it, and by deporting all illegals we catch inside. But would
that even be enough when Mexico collapses?
It’s time
to ask: Should we be proactive?
Should we
invade Mexico? Should we send our military across the Rio Grande to secure the
unstable territory, annihilate the criminal infestation that suppurates there,
and impose something resembling order? One thing is certain. The border charade
we tolerate today can’t be an option – it’s an open door to the fallout from
the failing state next door.
Militarily,
there are three obvious courses of action (I had input on this by several
people familiar with the issue; none of this reflects any actual operational
planning that I or anyone I spoke to is aware of).
One is
the Buffer Zone option. We move in and secure a zone perhaps 50-100 miles
inside the country, aggressively targeting and annihilating criminal gangs – we
know where these bastards are – and thereby seal off the threat until Mexico is
secure again and then return the territory once we are assured America is safe.
This is
doable, but it would take a huge chunk of our military forces (we would need to
call up most of our reserves). The conventional Mexican forces that fought
would last for about un momento before being vaporized, but
it would spark at a minimum a low-intensity insurgency by cartel hardliners
and, at worst, a large one by Mexican patriots, probably using guns left over
from when the Obama cartel was shipping them south. Regardless, it would be
expensive. There is the “You break it, you buy it” rule. We would end up
administering a long strip of territory full of people living, largely, in what
Americans consider abject poverty. They would become our problem. Moreover,
there is the giving back part – millions of Mexicans might find they like being
nieces and nephews of Tio Sam.
The
second is Operation Mexican Freedom, a much more ambitious campaign that would
recognize what liberals already think – that Mexico and America are one
country. Our forces would conquer the nation by driving all the way south,
perhaps with an amphibious landing at Veracruz for old times sake and because
the Marines would insist, then seal the Mexican-Guatemalan border. We would
annex the whole country, making it a colony like Puerto Rico (A dozen new
senators from Old Mexico? Nogracias). We would kill every
terrorist drug gang member and take or torch everything they own, while
simultaneously deporting every illegal from the US-Canada border to the
Mexican-Guatemalan border.
Of
course, that would take up pretty much our entire military and certainly spark
some sort of endless guerilla conflict. We would be stuck in another bloody,
expensive fight to make a Third World country cease sucking despite itself. It
would make the Iraq War seem cheap. But, on the plus side, Bill Kristol and his
bombs away pals would probably be excited.
Oh, in
both cases the Europeans would be outraged, which is a powerful argument for
these options.
Still,
no. Invading Mexico is a bad idea. It would convert the problems of Mexico,
created and perpetuated by Mexicans, into our problems. We tried that in the
Middle East. It doesn’t work. Making Mexico better for Mexicans is not worth
the life of one First Infantry Division grenadier.
But the
consequences in America are our problem, and we must solve it. That brings us
to the third option – Forward Defense. Think Syria in Sinaloa. We secure the
border, with a wall of concrete and a wall of troops, perhaps imposing a
no-fly/no-sail zone (excepting our surveillance and attack aircraft), and then
conduct operations inside Mexico using special operations forces combined with
airpower to target and eliminate the cartels. We would also identify friendly
local Mexican police and military officials and support their counter-cartel
operations outside of our relationship with the central government – they would
be the face of the fight. We would channel Hernán Cortés and, in
essence, we would allow friendly Mexican allies, with our substantial direct
and indirect support, to create our buffer zone for us.
This
avoids the problem of buying Mexico’s problems and making them ours. It’s
somewhat deniable; everyone could save face by denying the Yankees have
intervened. But the cartels would not just sit there and take it. They would
target Americans and probably do so inside the United States. Yet that’s going
to happen anyway eventually. This course of action risks the lowest number of
US casualties, but perhaps the highest number of Mexican losses.
So no, we
should not invade Mexico. There are no good military options, and none are
necessary or wise today, but we may eventually have to choose between bad
options. Mexico is failing more and more every day. We are not yet at the point
of a military solution, but anyone who says that day can never come is lying to
himself and to you. We need a wall, but more than that, we need the commitment
to American security and sovereignty that a wall would physically represent.
The issue is very clear, and we need to be very, very clear about it when we
are campaigning in November. Border security. Period.
Are we
going to prioritize the interests of liberals who want to replace our militant Normal voters with
pliable foreigners and establishment stooges who want to please rich donors by
importing countless cheap foreign laborers, or are we going to prioritize the
economic security and the physical safety of American citizens by securing our
border no matter what it takes?
Come on,
open borders mafia, let’s have that discussion. Bueno suerte with
that at the ballot box.
One new Mexican president. Dozens of new reasons to build the
wall.
In Mexico, it is often impolite to tell
someone "No." If you want to spare someone's feelings,
many people say "Maybe."
Everyone knows that means "No."
Mexico stopped worrying about American
feelings long ago. Among the fashionable public officials and
academics, scorn has been the ruling emotion for decades. We see
that more recently in the last week's elections.
Pretending otherwise is just too much work
in Mexico today. The new president declares he is a socialist, but
he will be hard pressed to show how his new socialist policies are at all
different from the old socialist policies that govern so many parts of Mexican
life. That's what we said about Venezuela, come to think of it.
But at least admitting they are socialists
has the added benefit of sticking a finger in the eye of their terrible
neighbors to the north – who everyone knows ruined Mexico by stealing a good
chunk of the country in 1848.
Anyone who reads the daily papers in
Mexico is reminded of that 157-year-old treaty every day: for most of the country,
the national slogan and curse remains "Mexico, so far from God, so close
to the United States." We can even hear it today from Mexican nationals and their
descendants in the U.S. who glorify La Raza at the expense of their adopted
country.
Oh, and by the way, Americans are still
waiting for any kind of public display of support for those who died on
9-11. Mexicans largely ignored it, when they were not supporting it
behind closed doors at their local universities.
The truly troubling pronouncements out of
Mexico City are even easier to find. The newly elected president, Andrés
López-Obrador, was gleeful during the election when he told his compadres they
should all move to America, illegally. His
encouragement along with his pro-poverty policies will set the stage for
another tsunami of illegal immigration.
Then members of López-Obrador's
Cabinet-in-waiting started talking about the war on drug cartels, and why
should Mexico do America's dirty work?
The first statement does not need much
interpretation, other than the obvious but often ignored: the new president of
Mexico is encouraging his countrymen to invade the United
States. Not with guns and soldiers, but with campesinos and huaraches.
It's a bitter and hostile act that we
should treat as such.
The new talk about amnesty for
drug-dealers is even crazier. This is just an admission of what
anyone who cares to already knows: Mexico is run by a collection of drug
cartels and other violent outlaws. This collection of criminals has
killed thousands of public officials, policemen, and reporters – all in the
name of preserving a criminal status quo that no one even feels like pretending
does not exist anymore. They even write songs glorifying them.
They get what they want when they want it.
That is why we cannot build the
Coulter-Trump Border Wall fast enough, tall enough, and proudly enough.
In addition to writing scintillating
bestsellers about black violence in America, good ol' Colin Flaherty also
covered Mexico for several newspapers and radio stations in San Diego, back in
the day.
AZTLAN:
THE RISE OF THE MEXICAN FASCIST WELFARE STATE in LOS ANGELES
formation”
with members placed all over the country, especially in
Southwestern
U.S. cities such as San Diego, Los Angeles, Phoenix,
and El
Paso. UdB sees its members as “Mexicana and Mexicano
freedom
fighters” whose “ultimate objective” is “the national
liberation
and revolutionary reunification of México and the
unification
of our peoples [sic] struggles across Nuestra América."
"La
Voz de Aztlan has produced a video in honor of the millions of babies that have
been born as US citizens to Mexican undocumented parents. These babies are
destined to transform America. The nativist CNN reporter Lou Dobbs estimates
that there are over 200,000 (dated) "Anchor
Babies" born every year whereas George Putnam, a radio reporter, says the
figure is closer to 300,000 (dated) .
La Voz
de Aztlan believes that the number is approximately 500,000 (dated) "Anchor
Babies" born every year."
INTERNET
RESEARCH: Professor Predicts 'Hispanic Homeland' 1. http://www.aztlan.net/homeland.htm
Professor Predicts 'Hispanic Homeland'
ALBUQUERQUE, N.M. — A University of New Mexico Chicano Studies professor
predicts a new, sovereign Hispanic nation within the century, taking in the
Southwest and several northern states of Mexico. Charles Truxillo suggests the
“Republica del Norte,” the Republic of the North, is “an inevitability.” He
envisions it encompassing all of California, Arizona, New Mexico, Texas and
southern Colorado
“The following is a partial list of politicians that are La
Raza members working for open borders, amnesty (illegal Mexicans are not
interested in citizenship) and no wall. The ultimate goal of Mexico is to
continue successfully using the United States as their welfare system, cut a
deal whereby the illegals can hop the border, give birth, pillage, make their
pesos and then return home.” DAVIDSIROTA.com
"After six years of the corrupt
and brutal rule of the PRI (Institutional Revolutionary Party) administration
of President Enrique Peña Nieto, Mexico is mired in pandemic violence,
unprecedented social inequality and staggering levels of unemployment as well
as deepening poverty for the majority of the population."
The elections in Mexico and the
political tasks of the working class
30 June 2018
The national
elections taking place in Mexico on Sunday pose vital issues before the Mexican
and international working class.
After six
years of the corrupt and brutal rule of the PRI (Institutional Revolutionary
Party) administration of President Enrique Peña Nieto, Mexico is mired in
pandemic violence, unprecedented social inequality and staggering levels of
unemployment as well as deepening poverty for the majority of the population.
The ruling
PRI, which held undisputed power from 1929 to 2000, is so hated that it chose
as its candidate a “technocrat”, José Antonio Meade, who is not even a member
of the party. He is running third in the polls, and there is distinct
possibility that the party will face a nationwide route on the local, state and
federal levels.
The
candidate of the right-wing PAN (National Action Party), with which the PRI has
alternated power since the dawn of the new millennium, Ricardo Anaya, is widely
viewed as a representative of the corrupt system of bribes and kickbacks that
he oversaw as the former head of the president of the Mexican Chamber of
Deputies.
With the
massive popular repudiation of these two traditional ruling parties, Andrés
Manuel López Obrador, the former mayor of Mexico City and now three-time
presidential candidate, running as leader of the MORENA (Movimiento de
Regeneración Nacional) party, is projected by virtually every poll to win the July
1 election by an historically unprecedented margin.
The coming
to power of López Obrador will yield not a way out of the current crisis, but
its sharp intensification and new dangers for the Mexican working class. Sooner
rather than later, a MORENA-led administration will betray the mass aspirations
for an end to the social hardship and suffering that López Obrador has
cynically exploited.
There are no
doubt substantial popular illusions in López Obrador, or AMLO as he is
popularly known. A 64-year-old professional politician, he began his career in
the PRI, leaving it for the PRD (Democratic Revolutionary Party) and twice
running as its presidential candidate. He went on to found MORENA after the PRD
turned sharply to the right, signing on to Peña Nieto’s 2012 “Pact for Mexico”,
which opened up Mexico’s labor market, its education system, and the energy,
financial, and telecommunication sectors to privatization schemes and so-called
free-market “reforms.”
The closing
of AMLO’s campaign Wednesday night, staged before a crowd that packed the
Azteca stadium in southern Mexico City, provided an illustration of the sharp
contradiction between the popular illusions in López Obrador and the reality of
his class position and political program.
While vowing
that the ruling parties of the past would lose the election, he promised that
there “will not be reprisals.” This means that the crimes of the past six
years, including the disappearance and presumed murder of the 43 Ayotzinapa
teaching students, along with countless other massacres by state security
forces, not to mention the wholesale corruption which AMLO has made the
centerpiece of his campaign, will go unpunished.
He promised
that “we will seek unity to the extent that we can.” Indeed, right-wing former
PRI and PAN officials are already being integrated into AMLO’s prospective
cabinet, guaranteeing continuity of the anti-working class policies carried out
by both parties over the course of decades.
He signaled
his readiness to enter a dialogue and reach agreements with Donald Trump, who
after Peña Nieto is the most hated man in Mexico for his undisguised
anti-Mexican racism, persecution of immigrants and demands that Mexico pay up
to $15 billion to build a wall on its border. AMLO said that he would propose
to Trump the creation of “something like the old Alliance for Progress,” the
aid program inaugurated under US President Kennedy in 1961 with the aim of
tying Latin America closer to US imperialism and forestalling left-nationalist
revolutions like the one in Cuba.
As López
Obrador has emerged as the all but certain victor in the July 1 election, he
has moved steadily to the right, even as Mexico’s ruling oligarchy, which
formerly denounced him as a demagogue bent on turning Mexico into a new Cuba or
Venezuela, has moved to accept him.
Indeed,
billionaire Carlos Slim, the richest man in Mexico and formally the richest man
in the world, warned recently that if AMLO failed to be elected president, the
country would face economic instability.
In an
appearance before the heads of Mexico’s major banks in March, the MORENA
candidate vowed that the “property regime” in Mexico would be respected, with
no plans for “expropriations or nationalizations.” He swore his fealty to the
“market economy” and promised that his policies would not “affect the banking
sector at all.”
Similarly,
his aides and advisors have walked back AMLO’s previous denunciations of the
drive to privatize Mexico’s previously state-controlled energy sector and open
it up to exploitation by international energy conglomerates, promising that all
such contracts will be respected.
The markets
have already factored in the victory of López Obrador, and by all accounts see
no threat to the interests of Mexican and world capitalism.
“This
stability is perhaps surprising,” said the director general of the Mexican
stock exchange, José Oriol Bosch. “There are always those who look for the
negative, but what is being demonstrated in the markets is that the country is
prepared for this process.”
After his
meetings with executives of major international banks such as Citigroup Inc.
and JPMorgan Chase & Co. in recent months, Wall Street is similarly bullish
on an AMLO victory.
It cannot be
excluded, given the deep crisis and bitter divisions within the Mexican ruling
class, that the 2018 election will be determined not by the popular vote, but
by electoral fraud. Such was the case in 1988, when the election was stolen
from Cuauhtémoc Cárdenas in order to install the PRI candidate Carlos Salinas.
This has
been the most violent election year in Mexican history, with over 120
politicians murdered since campaigning began. These killings take place in the
context of a continuing wave of violence, claiming 8,000 lives in the same
period, in a country where at least 35,000 people are classified as
disappeared.
The passing
of a Domestic Security Law last year has given the president the authority to
impose what amounts to martial law, deploying the army to the streets. An
attempt to impose a president under such conditions, however, could quickly
plunge volatile Mexico into violent social upheaval.
The
international working class has undergone bitter experiences with bourgeois
parties like MORENA, resting on affluent layers of the middle class and
employing vaguely left phrases, while promising “hope” and “change.” Just
across Mexico’s northern border, American workers made such an experience with
Democrat Barack Obama, hailed by the pseudo-left as a “transformational president,”
who, once in power, imposed policies that expanded war, accelerated the
transfer of wealth from the bottom to the top and increased mass deportations
to record levels.
Then there
was the election of Syriza in Greece. Hailed by petty-bourgeois left parties
throughout the world, it came to power in 2015 on the basis of promises to end
EU-imposed austerity measures, only to capitulate within months, trampling
underfoot a referendum rejecting austerity by a landslide and imposing the cuts
demanded by the international banks.
There is a
striking similarity between the campaigns waged by Syriza and MORENA. Syriza
formed a coalition after the 2015 election with the Independent Greeks, a
right-wing nationalist party that advocates anti-immigrant policies and support
for the Greek Orthodox Church, while engaging in open anti-Semitism.
AMLO’s
Morena is running in Sunday’s election as part of a coalition that includes the
Social Encounter Party (PES), a right-wing party comprised mostly of
Evangelical Christians that campaigns against gay rights, same-sex marriage and
abortion.
This
remarkable symmetry is by no means coincidental. In both cases, the alliance of
these supposed “left” bourgeois candidates with parties of the extreme right
represents an unmistakable signal to the ruling establishment that they can be
entrusted to defend the interests of both national and foreign capital,
including through the support of the most right-wing policies.
MORENA and
AMLO represent the interests of capitalism. It is notable that López Obrador
has not embraced or welcomed the explosive struggles of the Mexican workers and
oppressed, from the gasolinazo protests
against the hiking of energy costs to the strikes of teachers and the ongoing
struggles of victims of state violence.
While
promising the cheapest form of populism, a struggle against corruption—while
guaranteeing impunity for the corrupt—and minimal increases in social
assistance programs for the poor, it can be certain that a López Obrador
administration will respond to pressure from the working class not with
concessions, but with ferocious attacks in defense of the interests of the
financial elite that has embraced AMLO.
The acute
crisis in Mexico and the lack of an independent political alternative for the
working class underscores the urgency of building a new revolutionary
leadership, a section of the International Committee of the Fourth
International, fighting to unite the struggles of the Mexican working class
with those of workers in the United States and throughout the Americas to put
an end to capitalism.
Bill Van Auken
June 29, 2018
How to Humanely Reduce Unlawful Immigration and Shut Down
Open-Borders Democrats
Today's lesson on morality and human rights comes
from the probable
(according to polls) next president of our crime-infested and corrupt neighbor to the south (emphases added):
Mexican presidential candidate Andrés Manuel López Obrador (AMLO)
called for mass immigration to the United States[,] ...declaring it a "human right" for
all North Americans.
"[W]e will defend all the migrants in the American continent
and all the migrants in the world," Obrador said, adding that immigrants
"must leave their
towns and find a life in the United States."
Apparently, the U.S. must welcome an unlimited number of these
unwanted, by their
own president, Mexicans, because the U.S. is morally obligated to
serve as Mexico's social-dysfunction safety valve and ATM.
Did you know that "chutzpah" is the same in Hebrew and
Spanish? On the other hand, everyone knows that Obrador can count on
a large cohort of Democrats, who share
his view:
The reaction among immigration advocates has gone from outrage about
family separations to consternation about family detention, because their
ultimate goal is to let the migrants come into the United States and stay.
Lest anyone misunderstand, when Democrats say "the,"
they mean "all." Today, it's "family separations";
tomorrow, who knows? But whatever the Dems'démagogie du jour,
most Americans want illegal immigration greatly reduced and, ideally,
eliminated. The latter, most likely, is a pipe dream. But
not only can the former be done. It can be done using methods
already tried and proven.
First, yes, we need a wall. If the tooth-and-nail
opposition of our open-border Democratic friends is insufficient evidence that
a wall would work, consider, as President Trump has, Israel's
wall. Israel had an illegal alien problem, too – or she did, until
she built a wall, as a February 2017 Senate report confirmed:
The number of illegal crossers on the Israel-Egypt border dropped
after the construction of the fence, from more than 16,000 in 2011 to less than
20 in 2016 – a 99 percent decrease.
One can argue, as some do, that other Israeli measures contributed
to the decrease. But there can be no doubt that the wall was the
primary, and a major, factor.
So a wall – and ending chain migration, and ending the visa
lottery, and mandatory E‑Verify – will greatly reduce unlawful
immigration. But there is one more thing government can do.
Allow the writer, whose father immigrated to America as a refugee,
in 1948, to elucidate:
When the writer's dad got off the boat, he did not simply
disembark in Manhattan, casually stroll streets paved with gold and buy the Brooklyn
Bridge. First, he had to stop here:
In the first half of the 19th century, most immigrants arriving in
New York City landed at docks on the east side of the tip of Manhattan, around
South Street. On August 1, 1855, Castle Clinton became the Emigrant
Landing Depot[.] ... [W]hen the U.S. government assumed control of immigration
processing, [it moved] the center to the larger, more isolated Ellis Island
facility on January 2, 1892 ... because immigrants were known to carry
diseases, which led to epidemics of cholera and smallpox.
The key word in the above quote is "isolated," as in no
physical route for unlawful aliens on to the mainland.
Then, the dangers were cholera and smallpox. Today, the
dangers are MS-13 violence, lack of education and marketable skills, and the
threat of someday becoming citizens and voting for Democrats. In
both cases, the problem was a threat to the population from foreign
immigration. And in both cases, the solution was to isolate new
arrivals until they could be properly vetted and admitted into the mainland
U.S. lawfully.
The writer lives in New York City, and last time he checked, Ellis
Island was still there, repurposed as a museum. So how about making
so-called catch-and-release unnecessary by returning Ellis Island to its
original use and supplementing or replacing the current buildings with one or
more new, modern dormitories, where illegals seized at the border could be
housed comfortably, for as long as required, and with no need to separate
families?
On the other hand, Ellis Island is on the opposite side of the
country from the Mexican border, where the main problem is. Alcatraz
Island is not. What about the Virgin Islands, Guam, or any number of
U.S. island possessions, where the climate is both comfortable and similar to
that of Mexico and Central America? The specific location is less
important than that there be no physical access to the mainland, nor would the
housing need to be overly expensive – Quonset huts if space allows, or easily
convertible, and stackable, cargo containers.
The U.S. Navy drafting plans to house up to 25,000 immigrants on
its bases and other facilities, at an estimated cost of about $233 million over
six months, as the Trump administration seeks to ease a mounting crisis on the
Mexican border[.] ...
[T]he draft document ... also says that a Navy base in California
could house up to a further 47,000 people.
Problem solved...almost. It's a good plan, but with one
major flaw: perhaps the writer is mistaken, but it seems that all of the
proposed military bases are on the mainland U.S. Again, the
locations should be isolated, with no physical connection to the mainland. There
is also the issue of cost and not just the $233 million for six months (so $466
billion per year); one company has a $162-million
contract "to fly immigrant
children to shelters across the United States."
There is a better, and possibly cheaper, solution. It's
staring the Navy right in the face.
Surely, most readers know that the Navy maintains a reserve, or
"mothball," fleet of decommissioned ships anchored in various parts
of the country, including California.
Your typical aircraft carrier houses about 6,000
sailors. But think of all that extra space on the (unused) flight
deck. Aircraft carriers also have kitchens specifically designed to feed
thousands of people.
America is not suffering from a shortage of decommissioned
ships. Why pay hundreds of millions of dollars to fly apprehended
illegals to multiple locations around the continental U.S. when the Navy can
move the ships to the immigrants, anchoring as close to the problem as possible
but far enough from shore to keep illegals from accessing the
mainland? Other mothballed ships could ferry large numbers of
illegals to and from the offshore ships far more cheaply than flying them all
over the country.
Additional ships could even return rejected aliens to their home
countries – preferably, as Eisenhower did, on the side of the home country
farthest from the U.S.
Should any liberal open-borders Democrat complain, just casually
mention, preferably publicly, that American sailors lived on those same ships,
for much longer, and make popcorn while Democrats explain why what was good
enough for American sailors is not good enough for foreigners, who have done nothing
for America and who have no legal right even to be here.
Let all potential trespassers know that should they manage to
violate our border, the only part of America they will ever see is the part of
America they can see from the deck of a ship before being transported on a slow
boat back to their home countries, and unlawful immigration will
drop. Like a rock.
Gene Schwimmer is a New
York- and New Jersey-licensed real estate broker and author of The
Christian State.
VICENTE FOXES EXPORTS!
Border Patrol Agents Rescued 4300 Migrants from Life-Threatening Situations in 2018
https://www.breitbart.com/border/2018/12/14/border-patrol-agents-rescued-4300-migrants-from-life-threatening-situations-in-2018/
1:59
Border Patrol agents carried out more than 4,300 rescues of illegal immigrants along or near the U.S. border with Mexico during Fiscal Year 2018, CBP officials reported on Friday. This is up from more than 3,400 the prior year.
Border Patrol agents rescued migrants from life-threatening situations 4,311 times in Fiscal Year 2018, which ended on September 30, a CBP official told reporters during a Friday morning conference call about the death of the seven-year-old Guatemalan girl this month. This is an increase of more than 26 percent over the previous year’s 3,417 rescues.
During the first two months of Fiscal Year 2019, which began on October 1, The number of rescues jumped 74 percent over the same period last year, the official stated.
The rescues range from helping migrants who are in danger in one of the waterway boundaries between Mexico and the U.S., to saving their lives when human smugglers abandon them on vast ranches in South Texas or the deserts of Arizona. They also include migrants who are packed like human cargo in the back of tractor-trailers and other commercial trucks.
Breitbart News reports extensively on the recuse of migrants by Border Patrol agents. Frequently, Border Patrol agents put their own lives at risk to rescue migrants who place themselves in very dangerous situations. In a recent example, a McAllen Station Border Patrol agent came under attack from migrants throwing large rocks as he attempted to rescue a pregnant woman who had just crossed the border.
Bob Price serves as associate editor and senior political news contributor for the Breitbart Border team. He is an original member of the Breitbart Texas team. Follow him on Twitter @BobPriceBBTX and Face book.
WashPost Op-Ed: Girl’s Death
Shows Americans Are a
Threat to Migrants
5:39
The death of a migrant girl shows that Americans are a threat to migrants, says Never Trump author Jennifer Rubin at the Washington Post.
“It’s a cruel irony that [President Donald] Trump has portrayed refugees as a threat to Americans. In fact, the reverse is true,” Rubin wrote in a column that slammed any barrier or regulatory curbs on the flow of economic migrants into the United States.
Rubin’s column was headlined “Horrifying indifference to children’s lives,” and it cited the death of seven-year Guatemalan girl, Jakelin Caal, who was brought over the New Mexico border by her father, Nery Gilberto Caal Cuz. The subheadline on the article declared: The Trump administration certainly is responsible for death of a child in its custody.”
Breitbart TV
Fewer migrants will die while sneaking across the border if the federal government just provides a better welcome and easier asylum rules, Rubin argues:
With adequate border security and staffing, a sufficient number of immigration judges deployed to handle the caseload, reversal of the administration’s deliberately cruel policies … the current, intolerable situation should improve.
Rubin ignored the alternative policy of discouraging migration by careful enforcement of the nation’s laws against illegal migration and the employment of illegals.
Rubin also did not mention the thousands of illegal migrants who are rescued by the border patrol each year, nor the tens of thousands who are by border agents to file clearly fraudulent cases which are subsequently rejected by judges.
Also, Rubin did not mention the moral responsibility of the child’s father who brought her through the desert in an apparent effort to use the catch-and-release Flores loophole to get past border guards. The loophole was created by Judge Dolly Gee who has ordered border officials to release migrants after 20 days if they bring a child with them.
The AP reported that the father was an economic migrant:
Family members in Guatemala said Caal decided to migrate with his favorite child to earn money he could send back home. Jakelin’s mother and three siblings remained in San Antonio Secortez, a village of about 420 inhabitants.
Economic migrants are not eligible for asylum.
But Rubin posted a litany of complaints by open-borders groups, including the ACLU and America’s Voice, who argue that curbs on illegal migrant force migrants to take more dangerous routines through the scrubland into the United States. Rubin cited the ACLU’s complaints:
In 2017, migrant deaths increased even as the number of border crossings dramatically decreased. When the Trump administration pushes for the militarization of the border, including more border wall construction, they are driving people fleeing violence into the deadliest desert regions.
Rubin exemplifies the open-borders advocates who hide their views underneath a blizzard of nit-picking complaints about minor aspects of the nation’s popular border-control rules. For example, she quoted one activist’s complaints that the temporary holding centers along the border are characterized by “freezing temperatures, no beds, lights left on, no showers, not enough toilets or toilet paper, filthy conditions, horrible smell, inedible food and not enough clean water to drink, and [are] run by insulting and abusive agents.”
But Rubin declined to say if the United States has a right to protect its borders or to deport foreign migrants from the United States. She showed indifference to the huge economic and civic costs to ordinary Americans of cheap-labor migration into the nation’s blue-collar and middle-class workplaces, neighborhoods, hospitals, welfare centers, and K-12 schools.
Mark Krikorian, director of the Center for Immigration Studies, told Breitbart News:
The Democrats are using this [death] cynically as a cudgel against the very idea of immigration enforcement. It is shameless. It is really shameless.The left is objectively in favor of open borders. They deny it if you ask them straight out, but they are opposed to any meaningful measure to enforce the borders. Any time there is a tragedy like this they immediately turn it into an excuse for weakening the borders — and say at the same when you point to an illegal immigrant criminal [as a reason] for tightening the borders, they charge you with acting irresponsibly.…The logical conclusion of the Democrats’ outrage over this is that there should be no border enforcement because any rules about border control will also create people who evade them, and it is an evasion of the laws that is the responsible (mechanism] for this tragedy. The only logical conclusion is that we must have open borders.
For example, Democrats are now describing the detention centers used to hold migrant parents together with their children prior to their release or asylum hearings as illegitimate “internment camps.”
This “internment” claim comes after Democrats decried the governments’ release of children to government-run shelters while their parents were detained prior to court hearings.
Nationwide, the U.S. establishment’s economic policy of using legal migration to boost economic growth shifts wealth from young people towards older people by flooding the market with cheap white collar and blue collar foreign labor. That flood of outside labor spikes profits and Wall Street values by cutting salaries for manual and skilled labor that blue collar and white collar employees.
The cheap labor policy widens wealth gaps, reduces high tech investment, increases state and local tax burdens, hurts kids’ schools and college education, pushes Americans away from high tech careers, and sidelines at least five million marginalized Americans and their families, including many who are now struggling with fentanyl addictions.
Immigration also steers investment and wealth away from towns in heartland states because coastal investors can more easily hire and supervise the large immigrant populations who prefer to live in coastal cities. In turn, that investment flow drives up coastal real-estate prices, pricing poor U.S. Latinos and blacks out of prosperous cities, such as Berkeley and Oakland.
WHO REALLY PAYS THE COST OF OPEN BORDERS?
More than 7-in-10 households headed by immigrants in the state
of California are on taxpayer-funded welfare, a new study reveals.
The
latest Census Bureau data analyzed by the Center for Immigration Studies (CIS)
finds that about 72 percent of households headed by noncitizens and immigrants
use one or more forms of taxpayer-funded welfare programs in California — the
number one immigrant-receiving state in the U.S. JOHN BINDER
This week, lawmakers unveiled a $1 billion health care plan that would
include spending $250 million to extend health care coverage to all illegal
alien adults. JENNIFER G.
HICKEY
Two groups of Central American migrants made separate
marches on the U.S. Consulate in Tijuana Tuesday, demanding that they be
processed through the asylum system more quickly and in greater numbers, that
deportations be halted and that President Trumpeither let them into the country or pay them $50,000
each to go home. MONICA SHOWALTER
This annual income for an impoverished American family
is $10,000 less than the more than $34,500 in federal funds which are spent on
each unaccompanied minor border crosser.
A study by Tom Wong of the
University of California at San Diego discovered that more than 25 percent of
DACA-enrolled illegal aliens in the program have anchor babies. That totals
about 200,000 anchor babies who are the children of DACA-enrolled illegal
aliens. This does not include the anchor babies of DACA-qualified illegal
aliens. JOHN BINDER
December 17, 2018
Obama said illegal immigrant parents put
their children’s 'lives at risk'
When a seven year old girl died of dehydration and shock while in U.S. Customs and Border Protection custody after being brought here illegally by her father, Democrats and the liberal MSM immediately began blaming her death on President Trump’s border and immigration policies.
The fact that the little girl hadn’t consumed food or water for several days and endured who knows what other physical and emotional trauma over the grueling and dangerous two thousand mile journey from her home in Guatemala didn’t seem to affect the narrative of Democrats and the MSM that President Trump is somehow responsible for her tragic death.
What’s also missing from the Democrat and MSM narrative is any mention of Obama’s border and immigration policies - especially his personal feelings regarding children and illegal immigration.
A story on NBCNews.com on July 02, 2014 titled Feds to Wage Ad Campaign to Stem Dangerous Treks to U.S. Border shows that President Obama’s immigration policy included advertising designed to scare people who might consider traveling to America’s southern border.
The story claimed that “U.S. officials struggling to deal with a crush of children and undocumented immigrants arriving on the Texas-Mexico border are waging a war of words to keep more from coming.” And that “…the federal government is trying to counter with a Spanish-language campaign essentially designed to frighten those considering the journey.”
The most important take-away from the story was “the warning” content of the advertising which was: “Those who risk such journeys could be easy prey for ‘coyotes’ and criminal organizations, be robbed or subjected to violence, sexual assault, sex trafficking or forced labor.”
Obviously, the Obama administration was well aware of the dangers awaiting anyone choosing to journey to our southern border through Mexico. And in light of the outcry from Democrats and the MSM about protecting illegal immigrant children from what they deem Trump’s “child abuse” immigration policies, it seems that President Obama understood that child abuse literally began when parents either took or sent their children on a highly dangerous journey through Mexico to our southern border.
In a piece written on June 20, 2018 by Bryan Logan in the Business Insider titled “Immigration lawyer recounts a conversation with Obama about the border crisis that he says 'shook me to my core' Mr. Logan sighted a conversation he had with President Obama about separating children from parents who get caught illegally crossing our border. An excerpt from that piece explains Obama’s mindset and position on the issue.
An immigration lawyer on Monday sought to add some context to the Trump administration's "zero tolerance" immigration policy drawing criticism over its practice of separating children from adults they're traveling with who are caught crossing the US-Mexico border illegally.R. Andrew Free argued on Twitter that the fallout from the sounds and images from locations along the southern US border and detention centers where migrants are being held were an extension of practices that began under President Barack Obama.The lawyer recounted a 2015 exchange with Obama, during which Free said he implored the president to close two detention centers in southern Texas out of concern for the women and children being held there.Free recalled the conditions he witnessed at the detention centers where some of the women and children were held.Free said he brought up those centers during his brief conversation with Obama in 2015."It's wrong. And it's going to be a stain on your legacy," Free recalled telling the president. The lawyer said Obama's response, as he remembered it, "shook me to my core."In his tweets, Free recalled Obama's response to his suggestion that the detention centers would tarnish the president's legacy.According to Free, Obama said; "I'll tell you what we can't have - it's these parents sending their kids here on a dangerous journey and putting their lives at risk."
And there you have it; not only does this liberal immigration lawyer point out that the practice of separating children from parents began under President Obama, he also makes it crystal clear with a quote from Obama, that Obama believes parents put their children’s “lives at risk” when they decide to bring or send them to cross our border illegally - not the President of the United States, the Border Patrol, U.S. Customs or American citizens.
In Los Angeles, 95 percent of all
outstanding warrants for homicide (which total 1,200 to 1,500) target illegal
aliens. Up to two-thirds of all fugitive felony warrants (17,000) are for
illegal aliens.
“The Obama Administration seems to be
heeding to Mexico’s request by openly halting the deportation of hundreds of
thousands of illegal immigrants. Additionally, the administration has a
“backdoor amnesty” plan to legalize millions of undocumented aliens in case
Congress doesn’t pass legislation to do it.”
Mexico Asks U.S. To Stop Deporting Serious Criminals
In a flabbergasting request, a coalition of Mexican lawmakers
has asked the United States to stop deporting illegal immigrants who have been
convicted of serious crimes in American courts.
The preposterous demand was made at a recent southern
California conference in which the mayors of four Mexican cities that border
the U.S. gathered to discuss cross-border issues. The only American mayor who
attended the biannual event was San Diego’s Jerry Sanders, evidently because
his city hosted it this year at a fancy downtown hotel.
Among the cross-border topics that were addressed at the
conference was the deportation of Mexican citizens who have committed violent
crimes in the U.S. The felons are persona non grata in their communities, say
the mayors of Tijuana, Ciudad Juarez, Nogales and Nuevo Laredo. They want U.S.
officials to stem the deportation of such convicts to their cities, according
to a local newspaper report that covered the conference.
To support the request,
the mayor (Jose Reyes Ferriz) of Mexico’s most
violent city, Ciudad Juarez,
pointed out that of 80,000 people deported
to his community in the past three
years nearly 30,000 had committed
serious crimes in the U.S. Around 7,000 had
served sentences for rape
and 2,000 for murder. The criminal deportees have
contributed to the
escalating drug-cartel violence in his city, Mayor Ferriz
said, so he wants
the U.S. to make other arrangements when prison sentences are
completed.
If this seems unbelievable, consider that a few years ago
Mexico’s government formally complained that too many Mexicans had been
repatriated from the U.S. and that the entire country was overwhelmed with
demands for housing, jobs and schools. Various Mexican legislators publicly
chastised the U.S. for sending illegal immigrants back, explaining that the
country could not accommodate the “repatriated.”
The Obama
Administration seems to be heeding to Mexico’s request by openly halting the
deportation of hundreds of thousands of illegal immigrants. Additionally, the administration has
a “backdoor amnesty” plan to legalize millions of undocumented aliens in case
Congress doesn’t pass legislation to do it. CNSNEWS.com